Does it bother you that NBA Champions is referred as 'World Champions"?

[old skool]

I think it is silly to beat the semantics of "world" to death, when we can go crazy over "champion".

The team that wins the NBA Finals is just the champion of the playoffs. What about the winner of the regular season? Shouldn't the RS champion deserve the chance to play the Finals champion for the right to call themselves "World Champions". And what about the NBA Summer league Champs? And the NBA G-League Champs? And the winner of the NBA All-Star game? And the winners of the NBA Rising Stars Game and NBA Celebrity All-Star Game? None of those champions should be excluded because we "know" which teams are clearly better. It requires resolution on the court. The rules of internet semantics demand that all of these champions be allowed to compete for the right to call themselves "World Champion". This is serious business. There can only be one World Champion. Shortcuts are not allowed.

So, I think RealGM should form one committee to figure out what is required to determine what teams represent the "World" and a second committee to determine how we figure out what is the proper way to designate a "Champion". Doesn't sound too difficult.

Sent from my SM-N960U using RealGM mobile app

[kio80]

Pretty much sums up the American ego, America is the only world they see.

America the best country in the world, all other countries are run by little girls

[Salieri]

What does the country have to do with any of this? The NBA is an international league that just so happens to be played in two countries. Location of where teams play has nothing to do with anything. The league is made up of the best players from around the world.

The point that some people bring here is that a world champion is the team that wins the world championship. So only a country/national team can be world champion.
Does it bother me? Not really. Call it whatever you want. Everyone refers to it as NBA Champ. The wording of stuff is completely overrated.

I don't believe this was the point being made as others have referenced something called a world cup "club" (it seems in europe club isn't like your local boys youth team but they use it for pro teams). So they really think where pro teams play games should have some "world" aspect because of arbitrary boarders that millionaire athletes don't have to really even think about.

You literally quoted the post where I said exactly that, and you flat out ignored it to go back to beating the "players" dead horse.

Let's try one last time:

Players. Are. Irrelevant. This is a TEAM sport, which means the only entities competing to win a given tournaments are the teams. Teams, clubs, franchises, whatever word makes you happy. Players are just pieces in those teams.

I don't care where players are from, they could have been born in Neptune for all I care. There are also players from all over the world in every elite european football team (in fact, those teams are MUCH more international on average than NBA ones) yet those teams can't be described as world champions if they win a national/continental championship. Because they -the teams- are not from all around the world and they're not participating in a WORLD championship.

And sorry, but talking about millionaires or arbitrary borders is irrelevant to this debate. This has nothing to do with how rich those players are, and this has nothing to do with nationalism or arbitrary borders. You can redraw the borders, rename the countries or even delete them altogether and the NBA champ would STILL not be a world championship, just a continental one because the competition is circumscribed to teams located in ONE continent.

So far, the only basketball competition where the winner is a WORLD champion is the one among national teams. Among franchises/clubs, there is no such thing as a world championship. Create one, smash every other team -as we all know any NBA champ would do- and only then you'll be correctly labeled world champion.

[dhsilv2]

The point that some people bring here is that a world champion is the team that wins the world championship. So only a country/national team can be world champion.
Does it bother me? Not really. Call it whatever you want. Everyone refers to it as NBA Champ. The wording of stuff is completely overrated.

I don't believe this was the point being made as others have referenced something called a world cup "club" (it seems in europe club isn't like your local boys youth team but they use it for pro teams). So they really think where pro teams play games should have some "world" aspect because of arbitrary boarders that millionaire athletes don't have to really even think about.

You literally quoted the post where I said exactly that, and you flat out ignored it to go back to beating the "players" dead horse.

Let's try one last time:

Players. Are. Irrelevant. This is a TEAM sport, which means the only entities competing to win a given tournaments are the teams. Teams, clubs, franchises, whatever word makes you happy. Players are just pieces in those teams.

I don't care where players are from, they could have been born in Neptune for all I care. There are also players from all over the world in every elite european football team (in fact, those teams are MUCH more international on average than NBA ones) yet those teams can't be described as world champions if they win a national/continental championship. Because they -the teams- are not from all around the world and they're not participating in a WORLD championship.

And sorry, but talking about millionaires or arbitrary borders is irrelevant to this debate. This has nothing to do with how rich those players are, and this has nothing to do with nationalism or arbitrary borders. You can redraw the borders, rename the countries or even delete them altogether and the NBA champ would STILL not be a world championship, just a continental one because the competition is circumscribed to teams located in ONE continent.

So far, the only basketball competition where the winner is a WORLD champion is the one among national teams. Among franchises/clubs, there is no such thing as a world championship. Create one, smash every other team -as we all know any NBA champ would do- and only then you'll be correctly labeled world champion.

So if I read you right. Teams are from our WORLD called EARTH. So the nba champs are the world champs. The whole NBA is from our same world. By your logic if a team isn't from our world I agree they don't count. But this is a league of teams from the world and that's all you want.

[Salieri]

I don't believe this was the point being made as others have referenced something called a world cup "club" (it seems in europe club isn't like your local boys youth team but they use it for pro teams). So they really think where pro teams play games should have some "world" aspect because of arbitrary boarders that millionaire athletes don't have to really even think about.

You literally quoted the post where I said exactly that, and you flat out ignored it to go back to beating the "players" dead horse.

Let's try one last time:

Players. Are. Irrelevant. This is a TEAM sport, which means the only entities competing to win a given tournaments are the teams. Teams, clubs, franchises, whatever word makes you happy. Players are just pieces in those teams.

I don't care where players are from, they could have been born in Neptune for all I care. There are also players from all over the world in every elite european football team (in fact, those teams are MUCH more international on average than NBA ones) yet those teams can't be described as world champions if they win a national/continental championship. Because they -the teams- are not from all around the world and they're not participating in a WORLD championship.

And sorry, but talking about millionaires or arbitrary borders is irrelevant to this debate. This has nothing to do with how rich those players are, and this has nothing to do with nationalism or arbitrary borders. You can redraw the borders, rename the countries or even delete them altogether and the NBA champ would STILL not be a world championship, just a continental one because the competition is circumscribed to teams located in ONE continent.

So far, the only basketball competition where the winner is a WORLD champion is the one among national teams. Among franchises/clubs, there is no such thing as a world championship. Create one, smash every other team -as we all know any NBA champ would do- and only then you'll be correctly labeled world champion.

So if I read you right. Teams are from our WORLD called EARTH. So the nba champs are the world champs. The whole NBA is from our same world. By your logic if a team isn't from our world I agree they don't count. But this is a league of teams from the world and that's all you want.

It's obvious you didn't read me right

[rtiff68]

The NBA champion does not play the best team(s) from other professional leagues, so I get why it’s a little strange to call them “world champions.”

The NBA is also easily the best professional basketball league in the world— with teams comprised of players from all over the world— so I also see how calling the best team in that league “world champion” makes sense.

Regardless, if this legitimately “bothers” you, then you probably don’t have enough important **** going on in your life.

[MadIggy]

World champion is the team that wins the world championship and that is national team tournament.

[dhsilv2]

You literally quoted the post where I said exactly that, and you flat out ignored it to go back to beating the "players" dead horse.

Let's try one last time:

Players. Are. Irrelevant. This is a TEAM sport, which means the only entities competing to win a given tournaments are the teams. Teams, clubs, franchises, whatever word makes you happy. Players are just pieces in those teams.

I don't care where players are from, they could have been born in Neptune for all I care. There are also players from all over the world in every elite european football team (in fact, those teams are MUCH more international on average than NBA ones) yet those teams can't be described as world champions if they win a national/continental championship. Because they -the teams- are not from all around the world and they're not participating in a WORLD championship.

And sorry, but talking about millionaires or arbitrary borders is irrelevant to this debate. This has nothing to do with how rich those players are, and this has nothing to do with nationalism or arbitrary borders. You can redraw the borders, rename the countries or even delete them altogether and the NBA champ would STILL not be a world championship, just a continental one because the competition is circumscribed to teams located in ONE continent.

So far, the only basketball competition where the winner is a WORLD champion is the one among national teams. Among franchises/clubs, there is no such thing as a world championship. Create one, smash every other team -as we all know any NBA champ would do- and only then you'll be correctly labeled world champion.

So if I read you right. Teams are from our WORLD called EARTH. So the nba champs are the world champs. The whole NBA is from our same world. By your logic if a team isn't from our world I agree they don't count. But this is a league of teams from the world and that's all you want.

It's obvious you didn't read me right

Ah sorry, you think which tectonic plates a team plays games on has some meaning but have no reason why it does.

[Fable]

Imagine being bothered by the BEST LEAGUE in the WORLD calling its winners WORLD champions. Euro insecurity knows no bounds it's embarrassing how much you people whine on American forums begging for daddy USA to acknowledge your existence. We know you exist and we know your basketball leagues are terrible.

NBA, NFL, MLB and NHL are the best leagues in their respective sports and if any champion is called world champion here that is all that title is trying to convey. Somehow trying to spin that into some delusional American power fantasy is bizarre. Not one American would give a crap if the best euro soccer league called the winner world champions because it's TRUE. MLS cannot compete and we don't care.

But you can’t prove that year in year out unless you play teams from around the world.

Australia had the best Rugby League comp but we don’t say “World Champs”x

We also have the best AFL comp and don’t say world champs.

They have that, it's called the Olympics and the USA team consisting of all NBA players just took gold.

Spain won the World cup in 2010 with the players from Barcelona and a couple of Real Madrid ones. Nobody called Barcelona the world champions.

[jk31]

I don't believe this was the point being made as others have referenced something called a world cup "club" (it seems in europe club isn't like your local boys youth team but they use it for pro teams). So they really think where pro teams play games should have some "world" aspect because of arbitrary boarders that millionaire athletes don't have to really even think about.

You literally quoted the post where I said exactly that, and you flat out ignored it to go back to beating the "players" dead horse.

Let's try one last time:

Players. Are. Irrelevant. This is a TEAM sport, which means the only entities competing to win a given tournaments are the teams. Teams, clubs, franchises, whatever word makes you happy. Players are just pieces in those teams.

I don't care where players are from, they could have been born in Neptune for all I care. There are also players from all over the world in every elite european football team (in fact, those teams are MUCH more international on average than NBA ones) yet those teams can't be described as world champions if they win a national/continental championship. Because they -the teams- are not from all around the world and they're not participating in a WORLD championship.

And sorry, but talking about millionaires or arbitrary borders is irrelevant to this debate. This has nothing to do with how rich those players are, and this has nothing to do with nationalism or arbitrary borders. You can redraw the borders, rename the countries or even delete them altogether and the NBA champ would STILL not be a world championship, just a continental one because the competition is circumscribed to teams located in ONE continent.

So far, the only basketball competition where the winner is a WORLD champion is the one among national teams. Among franchises/clubs, there is no such thing as a world championship. Create one, smash every other team -as we all know any NBA champ would do- and only then you'll be correctly labeled world champion.

So if I read you right. Teams are from our WORLD called EARTH. So the nba champs are the world champs. The whole NBA is from our same world. By your logic if a team isn't from our world I agree they don't count. But this is a league of teams from the world and that's all you want.

Please dont act stupid.... Historically the world championship is a national team championship, not a club championship. Thus a world champion can only determined by national teams not club teams. Doesn't matter which players play where.

[Texas Chuck]

I think it is silly to beat the semantics of "world" to death, when we can go crazy over "champion".

The team that wins the NBA Finals is just the champion of the playoffs. What about the winner of the regular season? Shouldn't the RS champion deserve the chance to play the Finals champion for the right to call themselves "World Champions". And what about the NBA Summer league Champs? And the NBA G-League Champs? And the winner of the NBA All-Star game? And the winners of the NBA Rising Stars Game and NBA Celebrity All-Star Game? None of those champions should be excluded because we "know" which teams are clearly better. It requires resolution on the court. The rules of internet semantics demand that all of these champions be allowed to compete for the right to call themselves "World Champion". This is serious business. There can only be one World Champion. Shortcuts are not allowed.

So, I think RealGM should form one committee to figure out what is required to determine what teams represent the "World" and a second committee to determine how we figure out what is the proper way to designate a "Champion". Doesn't sound too difficult.

Sent from my SM-N960U using RealGM mobile app

I demand to sit on the committee that determines your committees.

[Texas Chuck]

Pretty much sums up the American ego, America is the only world they see.

America the best country in the world, all other countries are run by little girls

It amuses me all the generalizing of American with the accusations that Americans generalize like this. The irony is always completely lost. Oh yeah and the casual misogyny thrown in is just a chef's kiss.

Besides the issue with my ego isn't that I'm American. It's that I'm Texan.

[dhsilv2]

You literally quoted the post where I said exactly that, and you flat out ignored it to go back to beating the "players" dead horse.

Let's try one last time:

Players. Are. Irrelevant. This is a TEAM sport, which means the only entities competing to win a given tournaments are the teams. Teams, clubs, franchises, whatever word makes you happy. Players are just pieces in those teams.

I don't care where players are from, they could have been born in Neptune for all I care. There are also players from all over the world in every elite european football team (in fact, those teams are MUCH more international on average than NBA ones) yet those teams can't be described as world champions if they win a national/continental championship. Because they -the teams- are not from all around the world and they're not participating in a WORLD championship.

And sorry, but talking about millionaires or arbitrary borders is irrelevant to this debate. This has nothing to do with how rich those players are, and this has nothing to do with nationalism or arbitrary borders. You can redraw the borders, rename the countries or even delete them altogether and the NBA champ would STILL not be a world championship, just a continental one because the competition is circumscribed to teams located in ONE continent.

So far, the only basketball competition where the winner is a WORLD champion is the one among national teams. Among franchises/clubs, there is no such thing as a world championship. Create one, smash every other team -as we all know any NBA champ would do- and only then you'll be correctly labeled world champion.

So if I read you right. Teams are from our WORLD called EARTH. So the nba champs are the world champs. The whole NBA is from our same world. By your logic if a team isn't from our world I agree they don't count. But this is a league of teams from the world and that's all you want.

Please dont act stupid.... Historically the world championship is a national team championship, not a club championship. Thus a world champion can only determined by national teams not club teams. Doesn't matter which players play where.

Traditionally, nobody even payed attention to those national games for basketball. The only sport I've ever heard of that focuses on these things is soccer. And then olympics which are mostly a novelty and there professionals for the majority of history weren't playing in the olympics for basketball.

[jk31]

So if I read you right. Teams are from our WORLD called EARTH. So the nba champs are the world champs. The whole NBA is from our same world. By your logic if a team isn't from our world I agree they don't count. But this is a league of teams from the world and that's all you want.

Please dont act stupid.... Historically the world championship is a national team championship, not a club championship. Thus a world champion can only determined by national teams not club teams. Doesn't matter which players play where.

Traditionally, nobody even payed attention to those national games for basketball. The only sport I've ever heard of that focuses on these things is soccer. And then olympics which are mostly a novelty and there professionals for the majority of history weren't playing in the olympics for basketball.

You are talking strictly US americans here. The olympics while of course important for the players, as taking part in olympic games is a big goal for many athletes, are not that high of a competition. the world cup and also the eurobasket both have a very high standing in the basketball community (outside the US).

[Dennis 37]

and to make a broader point, likewise MLB, NHL and NFL champions are usually called World Champions for the reason that they are clearly stringest leagues for those specific sports and have the best athletes in those leagues than any other domestic league of that sport.

But, it's ignorant and arrogant imo calling world champions simply because it's a domestic competition (In some cases, USA+Canada) so no other country is taking part. So, calling it World Champions when there are dozens of leagues of thosr sports out there not even taking part is simply delusional.

I don't even care if there were only 2 countries in the world. New Zealand and let's say rest of the world was called "USA", it would still be narrow minded to call World Champions unless they face a champion team from New Zealand every season.

I don't know what the NHL champion is called in US media, but in Canada it has always been the Stanley Cup Champions.

[Maxthirty]

Pretty much sums up the American ego, America is the only world they see.

America the best country in the world, all other countries are run by little girls

It amuses me all the generalizing of American with the accusations that Americans generalize like this. The irony is always completely lost. Oh yeah and the casual misogyny thrown in is just a chef's kiss.

Besides the issue with my ego isn't that I'm American. It's that I'm Texan.

lol That wasn’t misogyny. It’s a Borat quote.

[dhsilv2]

Please dont act stupid.... Historically the world championship is a national team championship, not a club championship. Thus a world champion can only determined by national teams not club teams. Doesn't matter which players play where.

Traditionally, nobody even payed attention to those national games for basketball. The only sport I've ever heard of that focuses on these things is soccer. And then olympics which are mostly a novelty and there professionals for the majority of history weren't playing in the olympics for basketball.

You are talking strictly US americans here. The olympics while of course important for the players, as taking part in olympic games is a big goal for many athletes, are not that high of a competition. the world cup and also the eurobasket both have a very high standing in the basketball community (outside the US).

Define standing? Basketball hasn't been that popular a sport globally until the last 30 or so years. I mean you think China is really watching Eurobasket? Africa? South America? Australia?

People want to see the highest level of competition in a sport. Now I know for some reason with these "clubs" soccer was screwed up and there's no proper league for it. But thankfully basketball has a real league for the top competition. That's what fans should want. The world games? A giant who cares?

[ACMFFL]

Traditionally, nobody even payed attention to those national games for basketball. The only sport I've ever heard of that focuses on these things is soccer. And then olympics which are mostly a novelty and there professionals for the majority of history weren't playing in the olympics for basketball.

You are talking strictly US americans here. The olympics while of course important for the players, as taking part in olympic games is a big goal for many athletes, are not that high of a competition. the world cup and also the eurobasket both have a very high standing in the basketball community (outside the US).

Define standing? Basketball hasn't been that popular a sport globally until the last 30 or so years. I mean you think China is really watching Eurobasket? Africa? South America? Australia?

People want to see the highest level of competition in a sport. Now I know for some reason with these "clubs" soccer was screwed up and there's no proper league for it. But thankfully basketball has a real league for the top competition. That's what fans should want. The world games? A giant who cares?

Wat? Maybe I misunderstood you but the Champions League is still the highest level of competition in football even without the winners claiming the world champ title.
And what's wrong with the word "club"? On the other hand I think nobody has a problem with the word "franchise"

[Sakkreth]

Yeah kinda, cause it's technically incorrect. Just call them NBA champions, it won't make it less prestigious anyways.

[dhsilv2]

You are talking strictly US americans here. The olympics while of course important for the players, as taking part in olympic games is a big goal for many athletes, are not that high of a competition. the world cup and also the eurobasket both have a very high standing in the basketball community (outside the US).

Define standing? Basketball hasn't been that popular a sport globally until the last 30 or so years. I mean you think China is really watching Eurobasket? Africa? South America? Australia?

People want to see the highest level of competition in a sport. Now I know for some reason with these "clubs" soccer was screwed up and there's no proper league for it. But thankfully basketball has a real league for the top competition. That's what fans should want. The world games? A giant who cares?

Wat? Maybe I misunderstood you but the Champions League is still the highest level of competition in football even without the winners claiming the world champ title.
And what's wrong with the word "club"? On the other hand I think nobody has a problem with the word "franchise"

My understanding is the "champions league" isn't an actual league though. A group of teams have to qualify for it so it doesn't count because it means that there effectively are no set top teams. Or in a better way of putting it, there talent pool of players can be more spread out.